EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Head Raptor boots, who has tried them?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Head Raptor boots, who has tried them?

post #1 of 25
Thread Starter 
As the title suggests. I am considering these for purchase (in its stiffest incarnation). I currently have the 05-06 Head RS 80 boots and want to know if these new Raptor boots are so much an advance in design that they would be worthwhile investments.

PS: I only this past season finally got my boots to fit well after some boot shop customizing and footbeds.

Thanks.

Rich
post #2 of 25
I was just doing some fit comparisons today. The Raptor is significantly lower volume than the RS80, is stiffer in flex, and has a positive lower shell cant.

It's not exactly a significant advance, it's a race boot. Like many race boots that have been around a while, it's just different than what you have. The Nordica Dobermann is fairly similar.

SJ
post #3 of 25
What is a positive lower shell cant?
post #4 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by skinnydog View Post
What is a positive lower shell cant?
The lower shell has about a 2 degree lateral cant built into the mold. This is reasonably common on race boots and originated IIRC with the original Nordica Grand Prix.

SJ
post #5 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post
I was just doing some fit comparisons today. The Raptor is significantly lower volume than the RS80, is stiffer in flex, and has a positive lower shell cant.

It's not exactly a significant advance, it's a race boot. Like many race boots that have been around a while, it's just different than what you have. The Nordica Dobermann is fairly similar.

SJ
3
Actually the Raptor 120 is a different last and is more like the Head 100mm last.
post #6 of 25

Salomon Falcon 10

Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post
The lower shell has about a 2 degree lateral cant built into the mold. This is reasonably common on race boots and originated IIRC with the original Nordica Grand Prix.

SJ

SierraJim, could you please tell me if the Salomon Falcons (i saw that you carry the 10) has lateral cant built into the mold?

Thank you.
post #7 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalSkiCo View Post
3
Actually the Raptor 120 is a different last and is more like the Head 100mm last.
Really, its that roomy up front? : Hmmm..... maybe I should try the 130 RD then.
post #8 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Ox View Post
Really, its that roomy up front? : Hmmm..... maybe I should try the 130 RD then.
No it isn't that roomy. The Head 100 is really a 103mm shell with the FCS shim installed. In my barefoot test there is about 3-4mm more lateral room in the Head RS110 than there is in the Raptor. Also, the Raptor is dramatically lower in overall volume in the midfoot/heel/area and the heel instep circumference.

As a reference for example, the RS110 measures ~~113mm on the outside of the shell at the widest point. The Raptor measures 104.

SJ
post #9 of 25
Thread Starter 
So sounds like the Raptor boot is made for a more narrow foot...doesnt sound like a very good choice for my flat feet which are a bit bony and wide midfoot but then normal/narrow at the heel.
post #10 of 25
Most softer race boots has fairly similar fits. They may differ in details but are generally similar. If you are looking for the type of performance and closeness of fit that a race(ish) boot provides.....you will probably have to have work done to fit it. OTH....with a narrow ankle and heel this can be a good path to follow. Again, it depends upon what you want. Most race(ish) boots can be ground to provide 3-6mm additional witdh in localized areas. That is quite a bit and enough to accomodate most bony met heads.

That is about anyone can tell you without seeing your foot and placing your bare foot in the empty shell to see what's what.

SJ
post #11 of 25
Thread Starter 
Thanks Jim.

Rich
post #12 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by SierraJim View Post
The lower shell has about a 2 degree lateral cant built into the mold. This is reasonably common on race boots and originated IIRC with the original Nordica Grand Prix.
So does this result in a slight toes out stance as in the Fisher Soma boots?

I was hoping that the RS last was a more snug fit that the Head N100 and it seems like this is the case.

Also, Jim could you compare the tightness of the fit to say the Dalbello Krypton boots?

Thanks for all of your input.
post #13 of 25
I had the 120 on today and it fit quite well in a 27. Across the foot I would need a little work on the outside due to my flat-foot-ed-ness. I have a wide forefoot and most fitters push a 28. Low volume was noticeable at the back of the instep to the lower leg which I like and is uncommon to me in a boot. Nice boot.

I had good leverage over the upper shell. Really liked the flex. Might be the one:
post #14 of 25
The toe-in toe-out thing is entirely different. That deals with longitudinal alignment of the lower shell cavity. The lateral cant situation is side to side. While they can and often do interact, they are different things.

The Raptor and most race(ish) boots are very different than the Dalbello. The Krypton is on the low side of medium (if that makes any sense) volume. If anything the Krypton is a little wide at the heel base for many narrow feet.

SJ
post #15 of 25
I also tried two Dalbello models on yesterday. One was a lower end park type boot, but a good boot. The other was the heat moldable Pro (?). I found the heal hold in that boot better than in the 120. That could be me though. In the 120 my heal was very secure leaning forward and pulling up. But side to side there was movement.

Although the 120 seemed more of a skiers bood, the Dalbello impressed me a lot. I would never have considered it, but the fit is perfect for me and the flex was nice. There is a softer flex exterior tongue available as well.
post #16 of 25
SierraJim,

Don't mean to hyjack the thread but could you please tell me if the Salomon Falcon 10 (you sell this boot) has a postitive lower shell cant?

Thanks a lot!
post #17 of 25
Thread Starter 
Jim, can the 2007 FCS lasts be used in the pre Raptor boots (my boot)? Curious to see what the RD and or the RS lasts might do for my boot fit.

Right now I have the 100 FCS that the boot fitter hacked away so much that he made it back into a 103. The fit is good but there are some spots that I think a bit less volume would have been better.
post #18 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by alu View Post
SierraJim,

Don't mean to hyjack the thread but could you please tell me if the Salomon Falcon 10 (you sell this boot) has a postitive lower shell cant?

Thanks a lot!
Sorry, I missed that question earlier. I'm not at work for the next two days so I can't go check but I have not noticed a lower shell cant on the Falcons (or any Solly retail boot) and I'll usually feel it right away when I put a boot on.

As an aside.......with all the talking about the Raptor yesterday, I was in them a fair amount during the day and several customers wanted to try them. The response was really positive. I think that this boot will do well and and I really like the flex too. IF I were to replace my Hot Rod 130's this could be the one. (Although I do miss skiing in Langes)

SJ
post #19 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie-Rich View Post
Jim, can the 2007 FCS lasts be used in the pre Raptor boots (my boot)? Curious to see what the RD and or the RS lasts might do for my boot fit.

Right now I have the 100 FCS that the boot fitter hacked away so much that he made it back into a 103. The fit is good but there are some spots that I think a bit less volume would have been better.
Missed this one too....

The boots that use the FCS system have not changed nor has the FCS insert. The FCS system will NOT fit in the Raptor. I would not be at all surprised to discover that the Raptor RS(120) mold plug is the same as the older RS plug. Actually, I think that the old RD and RS were the same mold plug. I had an RD 96 in my posession last year because I was thinking about skiing a Head boot. The RD 96 was surprisingly roomy considering what it was supposed to be. It would have been a fairly easy job to fit it for my 103mm (diagonal) foot. I decided against it because I couldn't flex the bloody thing.

SJ
post #20 of 25
I skied the Raptor 130 at Mt. Hood and Las Lenas this summer. I skied the Head RS100 last year, and the Dalbello Krypton Pros and Mt. Hood as well for comparison.
I used the Raptors at race camp after I had difficulty aligning the Dalbellos, and found the difference remarkable. The response to turn initiation was instantaneous, with similarly remarkable lateral responsiveness. Recognizing the Dalbellos are not meant for racing, the differences are still noteworthy. The sensitivity in the Heads was also an unexpected upgrade vs. the Dalbellos. I then skied the Raptors in Las Lenas, where we had a foot or more of fresh each day. They were great there as well, allowing me to "butter" the turns as needed. I had no problem with overpressuring the tips, and powder skiing was a dream.
Lastly, as compared to the RS100's, the boot is more stiff as expected, but much more responsive.
Regarding fit, I did not downsize but still required quite a bit of work to relieve pressure in the toebox and laterally over the styloid process. Billy Kaplan (800-283-2370) in Bucks County, PA is a masterful boot fitter, and did an incredible job with fit and alignment. I can't recommend him highly enough. With his help, the boots are a comfortable all-day, all-mountain powerhouse.
post #21 of 25
Thread Starter 
Great review nipntuckski, thanks.
post #22 of 25
Any updates on early season use of the Raptor.

Thanks.
post #23 of 25
My son and i are both skiing in the Raptor 150 this season. Both of us had an enourmous amount of fit work done. Both of our feet touched the shell everywhere except the toes when shell fit with no sock.

Both of our boots were made more upright. And ground and some stretching was done(but minimally)

I am in a 27 shell (i wear a size 10 street shoe) he is in a 28 (wears and 11.5-12) street shoe.

We both have fairly wide feet. i have a higher arch and instep and very narrow lower legs & ankles and narrow heel and he has a big sasquatch foot and massive ankles and large lower legs.

I installed Booster Straps on mine as I found the new double looped double power strap way too beefy for me.

We are both skiing the boot at the 140 Flex setting as it comes from the factory.

I'll give feedback when the snow flys!!!

The 27 shell is 313mm (up 3 MM from the Rd 96) and the 28 shell is 323mm.

I found the toebox to be much roomier then my RD 96 both width and height wise.

We are both using the lace up liner and put the liner on first and then stuff the whole 9 yards into the shell.

He is using a Custom Surefoot footbed and I have a non posted Comformable' Custom Pro footbed.
post #24 of 25
I love my Raptor boots. They are the right width for me (I am skiing the Raptor 120) which is approximately 98mm at the forefoot while retaining the narrow heel of my RD 96's. I didn't have to get them expanded at all. And, the liner is much improved: not as bulky and much more sensitive. I would compare the fit somewhat to the old Technica soft plug boot (I can't remember the name) but it was popular 3-5 seasons ago. This boot is a bit more upright than the old RD96, and I feel a bit more neutral as well. Flex is spot-on for my weight. I would love to try the 150, but I don't need the increased lateral flex, and having a boot that narrow would simply mean that I would have to get it blown out a bit. As it is, I don't feel that the wider fit of the Raptor 120 is a compromise at all over the narrow RD96. Reactiveness seems on par between the two. Maybe it would be a little soft for gates, but I am not worried about that, and everywhere else, this boot is perfect. Fit-wise, the 98mm last is much narrower than the Dolomite Pro Z 98mm last or the Sollie 98mm last-it feels about 2mm narrower than either of these two. The Dolomite got pretty sloppy on my after a couple of days, as the heel pocket was too generous in size.

Also, I was more neutral laterally in this boot when compared to the RD96. I have no idea why, but I didn't need to fool around with shimming this boot as I had to with the RD. I am very happy with it, and it will be a great choice for many skiers.
post #25 of 25
Thanks for the update. I'm a level 7 skier at 170 lbs and 5'9". I wear a 9 1/2 street shoe and am probably between a C and D width. I've narrowed my boot choices down to the Raptor 120 RS (but wonder if the flex is a little stiff for me), the Raptor Supershape RS which comes in a 100/110 flex and the Falcon 10. The Raptor 120 RS at 26.5 probably fits the best all over my foot. I was surprised that the Raptor Supershape seemed more roomy given that it is also the RS last and I expected they would be the same except for the flex. Head doesn't list the width for any of the Raptor boots and the Supershape seemed to be more like 99-100. The Falcon fits well, but the top of the leather liner digs into my calf (fairly big calves).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › On the Snow (Skiing Forums) › Ski Gear Discussion › Head Raptor boots, who has tried them?